Jonny Anomaly writes: On the alt-right, it has become fashionable over the last few years to recycle a trope from 1930s Germany: “The Jewish Question” (to which the Holocaust was supposed to be “The Final Solution”).

The contemporary version of the question concerns why Jews have so much influence in cognitively demanding occupations, including science, medicine, law, and politics. Although the “JQ” (as alt-righters call it) has a mundane answer, many subscribe to elaborate theories to account for the fact that most Jews don’t conform to the stereotype alt-righters expect them to.

For example, when a scholar documents the fact that 4 out of the 10 speakers at an inaugural white nationalist conference were Jewish, along with a vast array of other evidence that conflicts with alt-right dogma, the predictable response by people in the grip of an ideology is that Jews do this to create a smokescreen: it provides cover for all of the other Jews who plot against white nationalists.

Introduction — Tanstaafl’s Journey on the JQ

Ford: Hey, I’m Luke Ford. I’m here with the Age of Treason blogger, Tanstaafl. Tan, you’ve been blogging for quite a long time. Tell me about your evolution, in particular on the JQ.

[background sound]

Tan: Sorry let me mute that.

Ford: And here with Tanstaafl*, so we are going to get that microphone problem taken care of, and then we are going to discuss Nathan Cofnas’ critique [of Kevin MacDonald’s book “The Culture of Critique”].. So Tan, take it away! Tell me when you started blogging. Tell me about the evolution of your journey on the JQ.

[* A pseudonym using the acronym for “There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch“. The phrase and the acronym are central to Robert Heinlein’s 1966 science-fiction novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress.]

Tan: Right. I started in 2005. I started blogging, and that was after I had spent about twenty years, maybe, of not paying attention, being fed up with politics, mainstream politics, and ignoring it, focusing on my career. But in 2005, I think, it was Hurricane Katrina that triggered me, the racialization of that. It was sort of a “Trayvon Martin” experience that many people experienced years later. I experienced during the Katrina thing.

And so I started blogging. I had been talking to friends before that privately, and I just basically took it public. And moved through pretty quickly neo-conservative thought, which attracted me at first, because it seemed like a more serious approach to politics, than plain old conservative politics. And then I ran into someone named Lawrence Auster. You might be familiar with[him]— that might have been where I came across you.

And it was really Lawrence Auster, reading Lawrence Auster, that made me aware that there was something going on with the jews. Auster himself was a jew, was a convert to Christianity. But what I noticed over time with him was that he was hyper-sensitive to criticism of the Jews. He indulged in it himself, but it was always from the point of view of “What’s good for the jews?” He thought that the jews, in various ways, he criticized them for not doing what was best for themselves.

[Luke Ford, an Australian living in the USA, who “converted” to Judaism in 1993, interviews Kevin MacDonald and his response to a recent critique of his highly ignored (by academia), yet important book, “The Culture of Critique“, by the 30-year-old, academically unknown, New York jew, Nathan Cofnas. Cofnas was scheduled to come on with MacDonald, but was unable to, due to time zone differences, as he’s in England, studying at Oxford.

Ford plays somewhat of a devil’s advocate on behalf of Cofnas, quoting some of Cofnas’, yet to be released, responses to MacDonald’s 18,0000 word response to Cofnas’s critique.

This transcript covers the first 71 minute part of the Youtube video with MacDonald, and not (currently) the remaining part of the total 220 minute video, where Cofnas does appear in the last third of it.

Overall, my take is that, it’s all a storm in a teacup, with very weak tea being dished up by Cofnas.

Now, the most likely reason that until now there has been, apparently, no proper academic response to MacDonald’s work, is because its main ideas are true and significant. So what was the message that has been sent out by organized jewry to academics? For over 20 years, it’s been, “Kill the message by totally ignoring it!“

MacDonald’s main point in his book is that jews, just like other human groups, act as a group to advance their interests often at the expense of other groups. Since organized jewry has maneuvered itself into being the most powerful group in Western societies, it has, and is wrecking utter destruction upon us! Especially by engineering the flooding of every White country, from New Zealand to Norway, with non-Whites, in order to racially and culturally destroy us! And part of the jewish group evolutionary strategy, to use Kmac’s terminology, is to prevent Whites from waking up to what they are doing to us, and responding in kind.

So, this interview is interesting, in that we get to see Kmac defend his book, his position, in his mild-mannered, yet strong way, against a young upstart jew making a name for himself. Cofnas fails, but rest assured, that another jew, defending their tribal war against Whites, will step into the breach and fire away.

Organized jewry is at total war with Whites, attempting to genocide us through whatever means. Kmac has helped us in exposing that, with his academic work, so we should all join together in supporting him, and others like him, in what ever way we can.

Nathan Cofnas responds: “Just read it. Pretty much what I expected. He repeats his arguments in more or less the same style, doesn’t address my arguments head on and in some key cases just ignores them. Probably I will publish an annotated version of the PDF.”

Luke Ford with

Kevin MacDonald

vs

Nathan Cofnas

on

“The Culture of Critique”

Published on Mar 20, 2018

TRANSCRIPT

(71 mins)

Ford: And we’re back! Just trying to work out the technical difficulties and get Kevin MacDonald back in here. I hope the audio’s better. Sorry about these technical difficulties, but these things happen. And now maybe this time we’ll hear Kevin loudly and clearly. So I think that’s the important thing. So, sorry about that and we’re gonna get Kevin in here any second. So we’re talking about his response to the Nathan Cofnas critique of “The Culture of Critique”. And Kevin says:

“I have a particular complaint, because of Steven Pinker’s not[?]anti–scientific approach to my work, in part responsible for my spending the last 20 years in the intellectual wilderness.”

Wow that is very honest! That’s kind of hot on the sleeve! That’s transparent honestly! It’s not like beating around the bush! That is just laying it down.

[01:00]

“Nevertheless, Pinker has moved the scientific and popular reception of behavior genetics of evolutionary perspectives forward. See, for example, his withering criticism in the “Blank Slate” of three of the figures discussed in Chapter two of “Cultural of Critique“, Stephen Jay Gould, Lewontin, and Rose.

And for all I know he is pursuing a tactical strategy of gradualism by supporting ideas that are still regarded with extreme hostility in large swaths of academia and the media, in the hope that things will eventually change. Though his recent work “Enlightenment Now” is not encouraging in that regard. The rest of Cofnas’ conclusion is simply name-calling — no need to respond.” says Kevin.

[ John Friend of The Realist Report interviews Paul Nehlen, a candidate running against supercuck Paul Ryan in his home State of Wisconsin.

Paul describes his background as someone who has worked their way up from the shop floor, to engineer, and manager of many manufacturing businesses in the States and worldwide.

He goes on to describe his awakening to race realism, and more recently, and most importantly, his red-pilling on the role of organized jewry and their genocidal intentions against the White race — KATANA.]

_________________________

The Realist Report

On this edition of The Realist Report, we’re joined by Paul Nehlen, a Republican candidate for Congress in the state of Wisconsin who is running against GOP incumbent Paul Ryan. In this podcast, Nehlen and I discuss his background and career, his decision to get involved in politics, racial realism, the Alt Right, President Trump and much more!

The Realist Report

Interviews

Paul Nehlen

Published on Mar 13, 2018

TRANSCRIPT

(66 mins)

John: All right folks. Welcome back to another edition of the Realist Report. This is your host John Friend. The website is the Realist Report dot com, where you can find an extensive archive of these podcasts, as well as other radio programs I’ve participated in over the years. You will also find all of my blog posts and articles, a contact page, my Twitter feed, which is embedded in the right hand side bar of the website, and many other useful and important links. I am a regular reporter for American Free Press. America’s last real newspaper. And I also contribute to the Barnes Review, the bi-monthly history magazine affiliated with the American Free Press. I encourage our listeners to subscribe to these fine print publications, if you are not already. Check out American Free Press dot net, and Barnes Review dot org, for all of the details.

All right! With that said, let me introduce my special guest today. It is my honor to have Paul Nehlen on The Realist Report, today! Mr Nehlen is currently running for Congress in Wisconsin against Paul Ryan. The GOP incumbent Congressman. Mr Nehlen, welcome to the program sir! How are you today?

[01:53]

Paul: I’m doing great! Thanks for having me on, John.

John: Thank you so much for coming on. I contacted you actually a few weeks ago, maybe close to a month ago. And I’ve been following your campaign very closely going back to when you first ran in 2016. And I was following you on Twitter, I’ve been following your campaign website. And I know you’ve basically been kicked off of Twitter, from what I understand. I’ve been very impressed with your campaign, especially the campaign you’re currently running. So, I’m curious how, because I actually reached out to you and then you followed up with me just recently. So I’m curious, how did you hear about my website, or are you just responding to my original email?

Paul: Yeah. No, I somehow came across something that you had worked on and we actually have a mutual contact. And I said, you know, I ought to reach out to him, in that context. So yeah, you probably ought to. I bet he’d have you on. And I don’t know what happened to the email that you sent to me. It must be got by me. So I apologize for that. But was glad that we were able to connect, and so, yeah, I’m glad to be here.

[Here, Canadian Prof. Phillipe J. Rushton at the Amren Conference 2000, reports on his travels to South Africa to find out for himself whether studies showing that Africans have an average IQ of 70, is true or not.

The very idea that there are differences in intelligence between the races has been made into a taboo topic by organized jewry, turning commonsense on its head and forcing people to believe nonsense about “racial equality”. One main purposes why organized jewry pushes this propaganda lie about the “equality of races” is to remove objections from White people to the flooding of their society with masses of low IQ blacks and browns. This is why rare academics, like Rushton, who tell the truth about racial differences are vilified in our jewish controlled media — KATANA.]

YouTube Description

An except from Prof. J. Philippe Rushton’s speech given at the Fourth American Renaissance Conference in 2000.

Ranging from original IQ testing in the classrooms of South African universities to the study of anatomy, Rushton once more details racial differences and explains why they are important. His latest research supports the findings that the average African IQ is 70.

_________________________

Do Africans Really

Have an IQ of 70?

Published on Apr 14, 2013

TRANSCRIPT

(12:25 mins)

[00:00]

Thank you very much. It’s a pleasure to be here again. The first slide is actually a postcard from South Africa, which I was very fortunate to be able to visit, about a year and a half ago. The New South Africa. It is a fascinating country. When you arrive in Johannesburg, as I did, you see a very modern skyline. In fact, it’s very undifferentiated from any American city, or Canadian city.

The roads are big super highways and the motor cars are modern. Even the people on the streets and driving the cars, for the most part are indistinguishable from North America.

On the other hand, South Africa is a city of, a country of contrasts, and there’s a great deal of traditional society as well.

And the reason I was in South Africa, is, because of this particular chart which summarizes IQ scores that Professor Richard Lynn alluded to in his talk, based on his review, which was published in 1991.

East Asians, both here in the United States and Canada, as well as in their home continents, as Chinese, Japanese and Koreans, average a slightly higher IQ than do White people. Now the average I have there is 106. Sometimes you see the average a little bit lower, around 103. Whites average about 100. A few estimates may place it a little bit higher and say 103. Black Americans average about 85. And again blacks in Canada, or Britain, or in the Caribbean, average around 85, to maybe slightly higher, up as high as 90.

[In this very informative two part audio interview (126 mins — Parts I & II) Henrik Palmgren talks with the well known revisionist Germar Rudolf. We learn of Germar’s reluctant inquiry into the issue of the Third Reich and the taboo subject of the so-called “Holocaust”. As a student of chemistry he ends up examining the chemical evidence, or lack of, for the alleged homicidal gas chambers. This leads him to conclude that it doesn’t exist and that the gas chambers are a product of Allied [jewish] black propaganda. Ultimately, he spent several years in German jails for daring to deny the existence of the “Holocaust” and where, against all normal legal practice: “The truth is no defense.“

He and Henrik go on to discuss the perilous demographic decline in birth rates among White countries, that will, if nothing is done, lead to disaster. Both the fraudulent “Holocaust” claims and the denial of White nationalism are interlinked in jewish propaganda, in that any claims for White self-determination are cast as something that leads directly back to the dreaded, “evil Nazis” and the “gas chambers“! — KATANA.]

Red Ice Radio

Germar Rudolf

Persecution of Revisionists

&

Demographic Disaster

Click on the above link, or copy the link into your browser to listen to the audio.

NOTE: You need to be a member of Red Ice to listen to Part II.

Published on Jul 29, 2016

Red Ice Radio Description

Germar Rudolf was born in Limburg, Germany. He studied chemistry at Bonn University, where he graduated in 1989 as a Diplom-Chemist, which is comparable to a U.S. PhD degree. From 1990-1993 he prepared a German PhD thesis at the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in conjunction with the University of Stuttgart, Germany. Parallel to this and in his spare time, Rudolf prepared an expert report on chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz, The Rudolf Report. He is the founder of the small revisionist outlet, Castle Hill Publishers.

Mr. Rudolf joins us to share the story of his life’s work as a revisionist researcher and writer and the ostracizing and persecution he has endured for daring to tread into the controversial topic of the German holocaust. Germar talks about the process of awakening that led him to question the “official” version of holocaust history in his mid-20s, when he stumbled upon the notorious Leuchter Report while preparing an expert report on the chemical and technical questions of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz and Birkenau for the trial of a “Holocaust denier.” We discuss the longstanding and brutal suppression of evidences that refute the cherished narrative of gas chambers used to systematically exterminate 6 million jews, and we look at the undeniable proof that the powers that be have been using this “miracle weapon” to psychologically trounce German and Western European identity. Then, Germar gives a straightforward definition of a “revisionist,” underscoring that in the case of the “Holocaust“, the general issues of persecution and unjust treatment of Jews is not denied. He highlights some of the chemical, structural and biological evidence that points to a starkly contrasting story than what has been painted throughout 70+ years of political propagandizing. Germar also touches on the thought crimes that sent him to prison for 44 months and the blatant lawlessness of court proceedings he’s witnessed, and he gives a rundown of his latest book, Resistance is Obligatory.

In the members’ segment, Germar goes deeper into exposing free speech hijacking and human dignity suppression that is at the core of revisionist work. We consider the massive power structure upheaval that would need to occur in order for Western civilization at large to achieve a complete paradigm shift and accept the fact that we have been lied to and manipulated on so many levels concerning WWI/II. Then, we talk about the establishment’s grave fear of the rise of nationalism despite the recent terrorist attacks by hostile foreign invaders in Germany and France, and Germar gives a grim picture of the migration statistics for Europe, which is seeing many of its best and brightest indigenous populations fleeing the monster and taking up residence elsewhere. We discuss the most critical extinction level crisis that is plaguing Europe – the demographic decline of natives resulting from the shrinking birth rate. Germar emphasizes the financial implications of Europeans allowing themselves to be bred out, and we debate whether or not the government’s (dis)incentivizing having larger families is really the issue. We give some thought to the role of the 1960s sexual revolution, the advent of birth control, and the lost sense awareness that we live in a chain of generations that keeps the social order on course. At the end, we weigh up how the crisis the West is spawning many religious zealots and a rising core of radical traditionalist who may or may not be able to rescue the vanishing European civilization.

Transcript — Part 2/2

[00:00]

Henrik: Welcome back ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us here in the second hour. Always a pleasure to have you with us. We are speaking with Germar Rudolf, the, well, “thought criminal!” The enemy of the state, if you will. We’re talking about his work, his struggles as a revisionist, his persecution by government and the authorities for daring to do research and have an interest and a passion in history that very few others have.

Now, I’ve always been very interested in these kinds of areas, in these kinds of cases where there is intense pressure from authorities, from the judicial, or justice system, and to go after people that hold dissenting views. I think we should all, as you said, in the first segment, Germar, interest ourselves for those cases, to try to see what it is that they are really are actually covering up, if you will. But I think we’ll probably never get people in office, in, you know, official positions to recognize much of this work. They might just have to be, I don’t know, replaced by a younger crowd that are willing to listen. But it’s very difficult, because the pressure and the programming and the propaganda is so strong.

In fact, if we look at so-called, you know, “Holocaust education“, that has gotten more intense over the decades, I would say. But before we talk more about what happened at some of the camps, what the data say, what your findings point to, let me just ask you:

What do you think it would take for the scales to tip and for people to actually open their eyes and have a more curious approach to history and the kind of things that you’re focusing on?

And what would the consequences of something like this, be, if people started looking at this?

[In this very informative interview (100 mins ) Henrik Palmgren talks with a well known Swedish journalist/activist Ingrid Carlqvist. We learn how Ingrid has recently woken up to the central role of organized jewry in destroying Sweden through the pushing of the Third World invasion of Sweden.

Prior to this awakening she focused her attention on Muslims, i.e., the “effect” rather than the root cause.

Since her awakening she has even begun to question aspects of the “holy of hollies“, the “Holocaust” (or “Holohoax” as many of us like to call it). As a result, many people who have been supportive of her work have suddenly shown another face and have turned strongly against her — KATANA.]

Click on the above links, or copy the link into your browser to listen to the audio or watch the video.

Published on May 1, 2017

Red Ice TV Description

Ingrid Carlqvist worked in mainstream media for many years, before starting Dispatch International with Lars Hedegaard in 2012. She has been a writer for Gatestone Institute and co-hosts the popular Swedish podcast, Ingrid & Conrad.

Ingrid returns to Red Ice to discuss her experience as a journalist telling unpopular truths in Sweden. To begin, she tells us about how she set out to understand why Sweden had become multicultural. Ingrid quickly realized that it is nearly impossible to discuss Jewish influence, as most people – even those critical of Islam – are unwilling to venture into such controversial waters. We then discuss Barbara Spectre, an influential American Jew in Sweden who has called for the end of European civilization through mass immigration from the third world. Later, we discuss Holocaust revisionism, and how Ingrid’s willingness to question – not deny – this historical event has affected her journalism career.

Transcript

[100:00 min]

[00:00]

Henrik: Hey boys and girls, welcome back. Thank you for tuning in. I’m Henrik Palmgren. This is Red Ice TV. You have also, of course, a radio version available of this show if you so prefer. Great to have you with us today. We have a special segment together with one of the co-hosts of Norse News which I definitely hope you have checked out by now.

We’re actually up in the third episode at this point., but we have Ingrid Carlqvist with us on the line today. And we’re going to talk a bit about some of the things have unfolded in the Swedish press over the last week, or so. She was basically drawn into a controversial issue of her raising some very important points when it comes to, you know, Swedish multiculturalism and what it is that we really are are faced and what it is that we’re battling in Sweden. You know, when it comes to the transformation of Swedish society. And it’s really important.

I also just want to mention this that, you know, Ingrid is a very, very talented journalist. I mean, she’s been, … She’s like a bloodhound, you know, she’s been digging into issues over the years and not let go. When she gets on a trail, she follows through and she catches her prey, so to speak. And in this case it’s really the same thing that has happened. So we were going to try to detail this today and try to outline for you exactly what it is that happened and the kind of chronology of this.

So, welcome to the show, Ingrid. Thank you so much for a coming on with us again.

Ingrid: Thank you so much Henrik! Thanks for having me.

Henrik: So tell the audience first what happened and how did this all of the begin for those who haven’t followed the Swedish press.

Ingrid: Well, it actually began, I think, we have to go back to February, when I had a speech in Gothenburg. Some people wanted me to come and speak about a book that I plan to write. And the working title of my book is, “From Sweden to Absurdistan” and I want to, you know, try to understand how did this happen. How did we go from 1965, when our Prime Minister said:

“We are so lucky in Sweden, because we are an homogenous country, not only according to the race. We are so lucky!”

And then ten years later, in 1975, the Swedish parliament decided that Sweden was not going to be a Swedish country anymore, but a multicultural one! And we’ve all seen what has happened since then, so that the focus of my work, what I want to find out is: How did this happen? How did we go in just ten years from a Prime Minister praising the homogeneity of Sweden to Parliament saying that Swedish is not good, we want to be a multicultural country?

And when I, you know, researched this subject I found out that it all started in October 1964 with an op-ed in one of the biggest Swedish newspapers called “Dagens Nyheter”, “The Daily News”. And it was written by a Jewish man called David Schwartz*. And he had come to Sweden in 1950, or so. He had been a prisoner in a concentration camp in Germany. And came to Sweden and started his life here.

Andrew Anglin

Somalian Refugee Nightmare

& Trump’s Fix

Published on Dec 2, 2016

RED ICE RADIO

Andrew Anglin – Somalian Refugee Nightmare & Trump’s Fix

December 2, 2016

Andrew Anglin is the founder of The Daily Stormer and has written countless articles on race realism, nationalism, Jewish influence, and social degeneracy.We begin by discussing the recent terrorist attack at Ohio State University. Since Andrew hails from Ohio, he’s able to offer us a firsthand perspective on the – and growing – Somali community in his home state. We learn that the Somalian refugees are overwhelmingly unemployed; many, though, are involved in illegal activities, such as heroin trafficking. Unlike other immigrant groups, such as Mexicans or Indians, Somalians aren’t brought in by the elite as a cheap labor force. In light of this, we ponder why our ruling class is intent on importing large numbers of people who are, biologically and culturally, very different from us. This leads to a discussion on the issue of Muslim rape gangs in Europe, and how decades of Jewish control of newspapers have pushed a narrative that have convinced White people that it is moral to commit racial and cultural suicide.

The members’ hour [Part 2]begins with a consideration of Jill Stein’s recent push for a vote recount in Michigan. We laugh at the absurdity of the situation, and Andrew reminds us that the recount will ultimately prove meaningless. Switching gears, we discuss the fact that some people still believe Trump is a Jewish puppet; Andrew half-jokingly suggests that the notion of Trump being part of a Jewish conspiracy is itself a conspiracy benefiting Jewish interests.

While on the subject, we take a critical look at Trump’s relationship to the Jewish community. Andrew stresses the fact that, regardless of how much praise Trump lavishes on Israel, his policies stand in opposition to the globalist machinations of worldwide ZOG. The members’ hour also includes Andrew’s thoughts on the recent NPI controversy.

TRANSCRIPT

Part 1

[00:00]

Henrik Palmgren: Welcome ladies and gentlemen, I’m Henrik Palmgren. This is Red Ice Radio. We are very glad to have you here today. redice.tv/live is the website. Please check it out for more radio shows, videos and our TV show and of course our busy news section, as well.

Well today with us is Andrew Anglin from the Daily Stormer. I don’t think he needs an introduction, frankly. I think both friend and foe do know him by now. A very effective journalist that covers the kind of stuff that very few others do. At least in the humorous, in the way that he does it. And, of course, there is a lot that we have on the plate today in terms of discussions to go into, from Trump, to the Alt-Right, to the recent NPI controversy. But also, of course, the attack on Ohio State University, the people there. By the, I mean the feral Somalis population up there. And do believe me I know the situation. We have them in Sweden too. I think you guys recall the Australian, Sixty Minutes crew that were in the suburbs outside of Stockholm to cover how great immigration was. They were actually attacked primarily by Somalis. So it is, for sure, a problem. But Andrew, welcome to the show. Good to finally actually have a dedicated radio show with you. We have you, of course, on our TV show before, but we haven’t had a chance, I guess, to sit down and spend two segments together, so thank you for coming on.

Andrew Anglin: I’m very happy to be here Henrik. I told you when you sent me an e-mail inviting me, I said I’ve been waiting years for this! [Henrik laughing] So I’m very, very happy to be here!